Reducing an administrative penalty by 63% for a workshop
After an environmental protection inspection, the workshop received a high penalty proposal. We found errors in the inspection protocol and demonstrated mitigating circumstances.
Environmental protection officials appeared at the workshop without warning and left behind a protocol with an application for a high fine. The owner faced the risk of paying an amount that could have closed his company for several months. Sarmatia Risk Control took over contact with the office to check if the inspection was carried out according to the letter of the law.
The challenge
Auto-Serwis Kurek is a local workshop in Lublin with 4 repair stations. During a routine inspection, inspectors noticed deficiencies in BDO records and the method of storing oil filters. The initial penalty proposal was 18,400 PLN, which for a workshop employing 3 mechanics was a huge financial burden.
The owner had only 7 days to bring remarks to the protocol. No reaction would mean an automatic admission of guilt and the need to pay the entire sum. The problem was also that officials interpreted errors in documentation from January to May 2024 as intentional action, rather than a simple oversight during a change of accounting system.
Our approach
We analyzed 84 pages of workshop documentation from the last 11 months, looking for leverage points. Our team checked the inspection protocol word for word, comparing it with the actual state of the oil-water separator. It turned out that the inspectors incorrectly recorded the date of the last device inspection, which was a key argument for the office.
We met with the owner to reconstruct the course of the inspection minute by minute. We learned that wastewater samples were taken in a way that could have falsified the test result. We focused on demonstrating that errors in the BDO system resulted from technical breaks of ministerial servers, and not from the ill will of the workshop. A concrete defense required collecting logs from the company computer from specific days.
The solution
We prepared formal objections to the inspection protocol, pointing out 3 gross procedural errors committed by the inspectors. We used the fact that the office failed to fulfill its obligation to instruct the party of its rights before starting activities on the workshop premises. We also attached invoices for waste disposal from March 12, 2024, which the officials had previously omitted in their analysis.
Sarmatia Risk Control developed a recovery plan for the company, which we immediately implemented to show the office 'voluntary disclosure' and a desire to improve. Instead of going on a futile war with the state, we used the provisions of the Code of Administrative Procedure to force a re-evaluation of the evidence. Peace in the company returned when officials had to admit that their initial calculations were based on incorrect assumptions.
Results
Thanks to hard evidence and showing errors in the inspectors' work, the marshal's office drastically reduced the dimension of the penalty. The workshop also avoided being listed as an entity violating environmental regulations, which allowed it to maintain a contract for the maintenance of 14 vehicles of a local transport company.
Timeline
-
October 14, 2024Analysis of the inspection protocol and site visit at the workshop
-
October 17, 2024Filing of formal objections to the office
-
November 29, 2024Receipt of the decision to reduce the penalty by 63%
"Sarmatia Risk Control entered the game when I already had a noose around my neck. They pulled facts out of my own papers that I had forgotten myself. Offices don't wait for you to learn the regulations, you need someone who knows them."